JURY FINDS DANCHENKO NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS
(truthsocial.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (78)
sorted by:
My understanding, and if I'm mistaken please correct me, they have all this evidence, but if the court just rules all the significant evidence as inadmissible, then they won't be able to make the case and get a conviction.
So, the intention of the Durham lawsuits is NOT about getting convictions, but to get evidence on the record in such a way that it can't be deemed inadmissible because the court had already heard it. In that way, when they have the case, it's not so much a pile of evidence, but a record of court transcripts that will be indefensible and automatically admissible to go after the targets... or possibly just to get the proof that the system is so corrupted that the military takes over to clean things up.
With all due respect, you are mistaken in several points. There’s no such thing as a continuous “record” among related proceedings - the trial testimony of the witnesses we just heard is not any more or less admissible in any future proceeding. It will be subject to the same analysis as to its admissibility as any other proposed evidence.
There are much, much easier ways to secure statements from witnesses than to hold an entire trial - the entire idea does not make sense to any lawyer.
Then the answer would be that this is the process intended to prove the corruption in the justice system as a whole.
If you have a better alternative explanation, I'd love to hear.